Interview with Rahasya
I want to allow the trajectory or arc of this dialogue to fall to a natural conclusion as I believe we have hit the peak of this particular subject. Perhaps we can do more in the future. I want readers to be able to follow what will likely be a relatively well-balanced introduction to what Tantra meditation is. However, I am enjoying this very much and keep getting drawn in and have new questions. I want to ask about your school, but I want to sneak a few more questions in first.
Okay, so here go my last few questions. I believe it is Gurdjieff who suggests that the percentage (98% to 2% or whatever) between what you are calling “bonsai humans” and seekers is a fixed ratio, similar to a cone (my image). In short, he asserted that we should never expect more than this percentage to be deeply interested in being this aware. I want to know what your thoughts are on this.
I like the old Hindu categories, Pasha, Vira and Devya, Pasha: in the nooses of family, tradition, culture and so on. Vira: motivated by urges to heroism, personal success and ego gratification. Devya: Divinely inclined, insistent on truth. In the Catholic Church, for example, Pasha are the congregation, Vira are the priests, Devya are the mystics. I believe the distinguishing factors are in part genetic and part the environment/nurturing for the first six years of life.
This sets the degree of difficulty for individuals. Individual spirit, commitment and determination and other factors then come into play. Statistics do not apply to individuals. It is very difficult to determine causes. Perhaps someone is a seeker/devya on account of having enjoyed sufficient freedom to learn directly from existence as a child. Perhaps it is their individual will and dedicated insistence on truth that enables them to see the freedom and the learning from direct experience that was there in their past– hard to say.
I am not much bothered with these discernments. The reason I mention it in my teaching is to help seekers get over their offense at the basic indignities of the culture's way and reduce the urge to outward rebellion/anarchism. When seekers get when they catch on to their being, in a way, a higher life form than most people, some meaningful challenges to the ego arise.
That is when I point out that Pasha out do them in persistence, steadfastness of principle and submission to the dharma as they experience it. They are concerned for survival, can be lured into over-indulgence but are not intrinsically greedy. Vira are driven further by their need to look good in the tribe– to be seen as heroic– to be rich. They can be greedy but they can also become benevolent philanthropists.
Devya are irresponsible, wild, un-accepting and greedy for what they hope is more significant, more wholesome– more wonderful than anything available to Pasha and Vira. The greediest, most highly developed egos of all. Get over being proud of it. In Tantra, a guru's art is to get the cooperation of this over-achiever-ego, and direct its power towards creating its own obsolescence.
In no way do I or the teachers of this school regard or use this description of classifications as an indication of who to work with. We are just aware that it is not our job to appeal to people of a Pasha inclination, or indulge Viras who dream of having a Mercedes in the garage and a Tantrika in the bedroom among their possessions.
To drag some Tao and Te into the discussion, if nature represents Te (the expression of the formless Tao) then though no evolution over time takes place, when attachment to thoughts or a materialistic version of life is released, true nature (original nature) effortlessly expresses itself. In short, the witness witnesses the witness and with fixations dropped, the biology of the body relaxes into its truth of health. Evolution is not a proper word for this. However do you recognize anything in this last assertion as accurate?
Accurate enough, at a particular scale, from a particular point of view. Certainly a good starting point for a debate with Gurjieff, both Krishnamurtis, the Dakinis of this school and perhaps some modern Advaita teachers, though most of them wouldn't be able to keep up.